Murray Millet Chapter 1

Prof milit educ system was incapable of lifint

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: h and broad support • Leaders wanted to create tradit formatioans and development withn regular army doctrine • But, it wasn’t just the support and money that allowed G to innovate War, Individuals, Orgs, and Doctrine • Modern battlefield underwent a drastic alteration betwenn 1914 and 1`918, but ppl didn’t realize, so innovation took placein response to last war, but as experts were still trying to figure out the lessons of the conflict British • Army faield to est a committed until 1932- magnififed lack of clarity- CIGS at that time- report was highly critical of army and made recommendations this should have been basis sof innovation- but, the report arrived int th early tenure of the next CIGS- new leader didn’t want criticism floating around- so, got waterd down version- • Major contributers to unwillingness of critical anal was the army’s leadership = but, even though leaders were unwilling to change course, the cultural values led to disinstreredt in innovation- • Cardwell system was morst glaring inhibitor- bc demanded units at home and forces in the empire had one to one ratio • Also, contempt to intellectual effort- prof milit educ system was incapable of lifint officers understnadig out ot the concerns of regimental soldiering0 never talked...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/20/2014 for the course STIA 396 at Georgetown.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online